Stop my task and all my waiting task - c#

i have an application who take all the added files from my Listbox and play this files:
IEnumerable<string> source
public void play()
{
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
Parallel.ForEach(source,
new ParallelOptions
{
MaxDegreeOfParallelism = 1 //limit number of parallel threads
},
file =>
{
//each file process via another class
});
}).ContinueWith(
t =>
{
OnFinishPlayEvent();
}
, TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext() //to ContinueWith (update UI) from UI thread
);
}
my processing file can be stop via my class property but if i want to stop all the files
that waiting how can i do it ?

You need to design your routines to accept a CancellationToken, and then trigger a CancellationTokenSource.Cancel().
This will allow you to provide a mechanism to cooperatively cancel your work.
For details, see Cancellation in Managed Threads and Task Cancellation on MSDN.

If you want to stop a parallel loop, use an instance of the ParallelLoopState class. To cancel a task, you want to use a CancellationToken. Since you are embedding your parallel loop inside a task, you can simply pass a cancellation token into the task. Bear in mind, this will throw an OperationCanceledException you will have to catch, if you choose to wait on your task(s).
For example, and for the sake of argument, we'll assume that something else will call a delegate inside your class that will set the cancellation token.
CancellationTokenSource _tokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
//Let's assume this is set as the delegate to some other event
//that requests cancellation of your task
void Cancel(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_tokenSource.Cancel();
}
void DoSomething()
{
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => {
// Your code here...
}, _tokenSource.Token);
try {
task.Wait();
}
catch (OperationCanceledException) {
//Carry on, logging that the task was canceled, if you like
}
catch (AggregateException ax) {
//Your task will throw an AggregateException if an unhandled exception is thrown
//from the worker. You will want to use this block to do whatever exception handling
//you do.
}
}
Bear in mind, there are better ways to do this (and I'm typing from memory here, so there could be some syntax errors and the like), but this should get you started.

Related

How do you run a variable number of concurrent parametrizable infinite loop type of threads in C#?

I am creating my first multithreading C#/.NET based app that will run on a Azure Service Fabric cluster. As the title says, I wish to run a variable number of concurrent parametrizable infinite-loop type of threads, that will utilize the RunAsync method.
Each child thread looks something like this:
public async Task childThreadCall(...argument list...)
{
while (true)
{
try
{
//long running code
//do something useful here
//sleep for an independently parameterizable period, then wake up and repeat
}
catch (Exception e)
{
//Exception Handling
}
}
}
There are a variable number of such child threads that are called in the RunAsync method. I want to do something like this:
protected override async Task RunAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
try
{
for (int i = 0; i < input.length; i++)
{
ThreadStart ts[i] = new ThreadStart(childThreadCall(...argument list...));
Thread tc[i] = new Thread(ts);
tc[i].Start();
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
//Exception Handling
}
}
So basically each of the child threads run independently from the others, and keep doing so forever. Is it possible to do such a thing? Could someone point me in the right direction? Are there any pitfalls to be aware of?
The RunAsync method is called upon start of the service. So yes it can be used to do what you want. I suggest using Tasks, as they play nicely with the cancelation token. Here is a rough draft:
protected override async Task RunAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
var tasks = new List<Task>();
try
{
for (int i = 0; i < input.length; i++)
{
tasks.Add(MyTask(cancellationToken, i);
}
await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
//Exception Handling
}
}
public async Task MyTask(CancellationToken cancellationToken, int a)
{
while (true)
{
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
try
{
//long running code, if possible check for cancellation using the token
//do something useful here
await SomeUseFullTask(cancellationToken);
//sleep for an independently parameterizable period, then wake up and repeat
await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromHours(1), cancellationToken);
}
catch (Exception e)
{
//Exception Handling
}
}
}
Regarding pitfalls, there is a nice list of things to think of in general when using Tasks.
Do mind that Tasks are best suited for I/O bound work. If you can post what exactly is done in the long running process please do, then I can maybe improve the answer to best suit your use case.
One important thing it to respect the cancellation token passed to the RunAsync method as it indicates the service is about to stop. It gives you the opportunity to gracefully stop your work. From the docs:
Make sure cancellationToken passed to RunAsync(CancellationToken) is honored and once it has been signaled, RunAsync(CancellationToken) exits gracefully as soon as possible. Please note that if RunAsync(CancellationToken) has finished its intended work, it does not need to wait for cancellationToken to be signaled and can return gracefully.
As you can see in my code I pass the CancellationToken to child methods so they can react on a possible cancellation. In your case there will be a cancellation because of the endless loop.

Cancelling multiple tasks by registering callbacks on cancellation tokens

I have the following code piece with the output below.
I was expecting the second task to be cancelled as it also registers a callback on the cancellation token.
But the cancellation only happens on the first task, where the original cancellation was done.
Aren't cancellations supposed to be propagated to all token instances?
The Microsoft article on Cancellation Tokens does not explain this well.
Any pointers on why this is happening?
Code:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
AsyncProgramming();
Console.ReadLine();
}
private static async void AsyncProgramming()
{
try
{
using (var cts = new CancellationTokenSource())
{
var task2 = CreateTask2(cts);
var task1 = CreateTask1(cts);
Thread.Sleep(5000);
await Task.WhenAll(task2, task1);
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine(e.Message);
}
Console.WriteLine("Both tasks over");
}
private static async Task CreateTask1(CancellationTokenSource cts)
{
try
{
cts.Token.Register(() => { cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); });
await Task.Delay(5000);
Console.WriteLine("This is task one");
cts.Cancel();
Console.WriteLine("This should not be printed because the task was cancelled");
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task 1 exception: " + e.Message);
Console.WriteLine("Task 1 was cancelled");
}
}
private static async Task CreateTask2(CancellationTokenSource cts)
{
try
{
cts.Token.Register(() =>
{
Console.WriteLine("Write something");
Thread.CurrentThread.Abort();
cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
});
await Task.Delay(8000);
Console.WriteLine("This is task two");
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task 2 was cancelled by Task 1");
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
}
}
Output:
This is task one
Write something
Task 1 exception: Thread was being aborted.
Task 1 was cancelled
This is task two
Thread was being aborted.
Both tasks over
The first thing is that when you call CancellationToken.Register all it normally does is to store the delegate to call later.
The thread/logic flow calling CancellationTokenSource.Cancel runs all previously registered delegates, regardless of where those were registered from. This means any exception thrown in those normally does not relate in any way to the methods that called Register.
Side note 1: I said normally above, because there is a case where the call to Register will run the delegate right away. I think this is why the msdn documentation is extra confusing. Specifically: if the token was already cancelled, then Register will run the delegate right away, instead of storing it to be ran later. Underneath that happens in CancellationTokenSource.InternalRegister.
The second thing to complete the picture is that all CancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested does is to throw an exception wherever it is being ran from. That would normally be wherever CancellationTokenSource.Cancel was called from. Note that normally all registered delegates are ran, even if some of those throw an exception.
Side note 2: throwing ThreadAbortException changes the intended logic in the Cancel method, because that special exception can't be caught. When faced with that, cancel stops running any further delegates. The same happens to the calling code, even when catching exceptions.
The last thing to note, is that the presence of the CancellationToken does not affect the logic flow of the methods. All lines in the method run, unless there is code explicitely exiting the method, for example, by throwing an exception. This is what happens if you pass the cancellation token to the Task.Delay calls and it gets cancelled from somewhere else before the time passes. It is also what happens if you were to put calls to CancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested after specific lines in your method.
It is not just the second task that fails to cancel. Both registrations to the token work and both ThrowIfCancellationRequested fire, but they are not handled because they run in a different thread.
This happens in the background (twice):
An exception of type 'System.OperationCanceledException' occurred in mscorlib.dll but was not handled in user code
What you should do is call cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); in your function instead of registering to the event.
See the examples at https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/threading/cancellation-in-managed-threads
Right now you are combining two ways of cancellation: registering to the token cancel event (Token.Register), and throwing if the token is cancelled (Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested).
Either you subscribe to the cancel event and perform your own cancel/cleanup logic, or you check in your function code if you should cancel your operation.
An example would look like this:
private static async Task CreateTask2(CancellationToken token)
{
try
{
// Pass on the token when calling other functions.
await Task.Delay(8000, token);
// And manually check during long operations.
for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++)
{
// Do we need to cancel?
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
// Simulating work.
Thread.SpinWait(5000);
}
Console.WriteLine("This is task two");
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task 2 was cancelled by Task 1");
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
}
Registration of a delegate by Register is just a way to notify when a token goes to the cancelled state, no more. In order to do the cancellation you need to react on this notification in the code and it's mostly needed when execution you want to cancel goes to a stage where cancellation token isn't verified (for example because a method being executed just doesn't accept CancellationToken as paramater) but you still need some control of cancellation state. But in all cases when you deal with executuon of code which has access to CancellationToken you just don't need to subscribe on the cancellation notification.
In your case the first delegate raises exception and this exception is propagated to the Cancel call only that's why the task is cancelled, but this is improper design as you shouldn't deal with CancellationTokenSource in your tasks and shouldn't initiate a cancellation in there, so I'd say that the first cancellation works only by coincidence. For the second task the delegate is invoked but nothing triggers the cancellation inside the task so why should it be cancelled ?

Cancel Long Running task [duplicate]

In a thread, I create some System.Threading.Task and start each task.
When I do a .Abort() to kill the thread, the tasks are not aborted.
How can I transmit the .Abort() to my tasks ?
You can't. Tasks use background threads from the thread pool. Also canceling threads using the Abort method is not recommended. You may take a look at the following blog post which explains a proper way of canceling tasks using cancellation tokens. Here's an example:
class Program
{
static void Main()
{
var ts = new CancellationTokenSource();
CancellationToken ct = ts.Token;
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
while (true)
{
// do some heavy work here
Thread.Sleep(100);
if (ct.IsCancellationRequested)
{
// another thread decided to cancel
Console.WriteLine("task canceled");
break;
}
}
}, ct);
// Simulate waiting 3s for the task to complete
Thread.Sleep(3000);
// Can't wait anymore => cancel this task
ts.Cancel();
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
Like this post suggests, this can be done in the following way:
int Foo(CancellationToken token)
{
Thread t = Thread.CurrentThread;
using (token.Register(t.Abort))
{
// compute-bound work here
}
}
Although it works, it's not recommended to use such approach. If you can control the code that executes in task, you'd better go with proper handling of cancellation.
Aborting a Task is easily possible if you capture the thread in which the task is running in. Here is an example code to demonstrate this:
void Main()
{
Thread thread = null;
Task t = Task.Run(() =>
{
//Capture the thread
thread = Thread.CurrentThread;
//Simulate work (usually from 3rd party code)
Thread.Sleep(1000);
//If you comment out thread.Abort(), then this will be displayed
Console.WriteLine("Task finished!");
});
//This is needed in the example to avoid thread being still NULL
Thread.Sleep(10);
//Cancel the task by aborting the thread
thread.Abort();
}
I used Task.Run() to show the most common use-case for this - using the comfort of Tasks with old single-threaded code, which does not use the CancellationTokenSource class to determine if it should be canceled or not.
This sort of thing is one of the logistical reasons why Abort is deprecated. First and foremost, do not use Thread.Abort() to cancel or stop a thread if at all possible. Abort() should only be used to forcefully kill a thread that is not responding to more peaceful requests to stop in a timely fashion.
That being said, you need to provide a shared cancellation indicator that one thread sets and waits while the other thread periodically checks and gracefully exits. .NET 4 includes a structure designed specifically for this purpose, the CancellationToken.
I use a mixed approach to cancel a task.
Firstly, I'm trying to Cancel it politely with using the Cancellation.
If it's still running (e.g. due to a developer's mistake), then misbehave and kill it using an old-school Abort method.
Checkout an example below:
private CancellationTokenSource taskToken;
private AutoResetEvent awaitReplyOnRequestEvent = new AutoResetEvent(false);
void Main()
{
// Start a task which is doing nothing but sleeps 1s
LaunchTaskAsync();
Thread.Sleep(100);
// Stop the task
StopTask();
}
/// <summary>
/// Launch task in a new thread
/// </summary>
void LaunchTaskAsync()
{
taskToken = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
try
{ //Capture the thread
runningTaskThread = Thread.CurrentThread;
// Run the task
if (taskToken.IsCancellationRequested || !awaitReplyOnRequestEvent.WaitOne(10000))
return;
Console.WriteLine("Task finished!");
}
catch (Exception exc)
{
// Handle exception
}
}, taskToken.Token);
}
/// <summary>
/// Stop running task
/// </summary>
void StopTask()
{
// Attempt to cancel the task politely
if (taskToken != null)
{
if (taskToken.IsCancellationRequested)
return;
else
taskToken.Cancel();
}
// Notify a waiting thread that an event has occurred
if (awaitReplyOnRequestEvent != null)
awaitReplyOnRequestEvent.Set();
// If 1 sec later the task is still running, kill it cruelly
if (runningTaskThread != null)
{
try
{
runningTaskThread.Join(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
runningTaskThread.Abort();
}
}
}
To answer Prerak K's question about how to use CancellationTokens when not using an anonymous method in Task.Factory.StartNew(), you pass the CancellationToken as a parameter into the method you're starting with StartNew(), as shown in the MSDN example here.
e.g.
var tokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
var token = tokenSource.Token;
Task.Factory.StartNew( () => DoSomeWork(1, token), token);
static void DoSomeWork(int taskNum, CancellationToken ct)
{
// Do work here, checking and acting on ct.IsCancellationRequested where applicable,
}
You should not try to do this directly. Design your tasks to work with a CancellationToken, and cancel them this way.
In addition, I would recommend changing your main thread to function via a CancellationToken as well. Calling Thread.Abort() is a bad idea - it can lead to various problems that are very difficult to diagnose. Instead, that thread can use the same Cancellation that your tasks use - and the same CancellationTokenSource can be used to trigger the cancellation of all of your tasks and your main thread.
This will lead to a far simpler, and safer, design.
Tasks have first class support for cancellation via cancellation tokens. Create your tasks with cancellation tokens, and cancel the tasks via these explicitly.
You can use a CancellationToken to control whether the task gets cancelled. Are you talking about aborting it before it's started ("nevermind, I already did this"), or actually interrupting it in middle? If the former, the CancellationToken can be helpful; if the latter, you will probably need to implement your own "bail out" mechanism and check at appropriate points in the task execution whether you should fail fast (you can still use the CancellationToken to help you, but it's a little more manual).
MSDN has an article about cancelling Tasks:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd997396.aspx
Task are being executed on the ThreadPool (at least, if you are using the default factory), so aborting the thread cannot affect the tasks. For aborting tasks, see Task Cancellation on msdn.
I tried CancellationTokenSource but i can't do this. And i did do this with my own way. And it works.
namespace Blokick.Provider
{
public class SignalRConnectProvider
{
public SignalRConnectProvider()
{
}
public bool IsStopRequested { get; set; } = false; //1-)This is important and default `false`.
public async Task<string> ConnectTab()
{
string messageText = "";
for (int count = 1; count < 20; count++)
{
if (count == 1)
{
//Do stuff.
}
try
{
//Do stuff.
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
//Do stuff.
}
if (IsStopRequested) //3-)This is important. The control of the task stopping request. Must be true and in inside.
{
return messageText = "Task stopped."; //4-) And so return and exit the code and task.
}
if (Connected)
{
//Do stuff.
}
if (count == 19)
{
//Do stuff.
}
}
return messageText;
}
}
}
And another class of the calling the method:
namespace Blokick.Views
{
[XamlCompilation(XamlCompilationOptions.Compile)]
public partial class MessagePerson : ContentPage
{
SignalRConnectProvider signalR = new SignalRConnectProvider();
public MessagePerson()
{
InitializeComponent();
signalR.IsStopRequested = true; // 2-) And this. Make true if running the task and go inside if statement of the IsStopRequested property.
if (signalR.ChatHubProxy != null)
{
signalR.Disconnect();
}
LoadSignalRMessage();
}
}
}
You can abort a task like a thread if you can cause the task to be created on its own thread and call Abort on its Thread object. By default, a task runs on a thread pool thread or the calling thread - neither of which you typically want to abort.
To ensure the task gets its own thread, create a custom scheduler derived from TaskScheduler. In your implementation of QueueTask, create a new thread and use it to execute the task. Later, you can abort the thread, which will cause the task to complete in a faulted state with a ThreadAbortException.
Use this task scheduler:
class SingleThreadTaskScheduler : TaskScheduler
{
public Thread TaskThread { get; private set; }
protected override void QueueTask(Task task)
{
TaskThread = new Thread(() => TryExecuteTask(task));
TaskThread.Start();
}
protected override IEnumerable<Task> GetScheduledTasks() => throw new NotSupportedException(); // Unused
protected override bool TryExecuteTaskInline(Task task, bool taskWasPreviouslyQueued) => throw new NotSupportedException(); // Unused
}
Start your task like this:
var scheduler = new SingleThreadTaskScheduler();
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(action, cancellationToken, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning, scheduler);
Later, you can abort with:
scheduler.TaskThread.Abort();
Note that the caveat about aborting a thread still applies:
The Thread.Abort method should be used with caution. Particularly when you call it to abort a thread other than the current thread, you do not know what code has executed or failed to execute when the ThreadAbortException is thrown, nor can you be certain of the state of your application or any application and user state that it is responsible for preserving. For example, calling Thread.Abort may prevent static constructors from executing or prevent the release of unmanaged resources.
You can use this class..:
It works for all typs of returned Values..
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace CarNUChargeTester
{
public class TimeOutTaskRunner<T>
{
private Func<T> func;
private int sec;
private T result;
public TimeOutTaskRunner(Func<T> func, int sec)
{
this.func = func;
this.sec = sec;
}
public bool run()
{
var scheduler = new SingleThreadTaskScheduler();
Task<T> task = Task<T>.Factory.StartNew(func, (new CancellationTokenSource()).Token, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning, scheduler);
if (!task.Wait(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(sec)))
{
scheduler.TaskThread.Abort();
return false;
}
result = task.Result;
return true;
}
public T getResult() { return result; }
}
class SingleThreadTaskScheduler : TaskScheduler
{
public Thread TaskThread { get; private set; }
protected override void QueueTask(Task task)
{
TaskThread = new Thread(() => TryExecuteTask(task));
TaskThread.Start();
}
protected override IEnumerable<Task> GetScheduledTasks() => throw new NotSupportedException();
protected override bool TryExecuteTaskInline(Task task, bool taskWasPreviouslyQueued) => throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
To use it you can write:
TimeOutTaskRunner<string> tr = new TimeOutTaskRunner<string>(f, 10); // 10 sec to run f
if (!tr.run())
errorMsg("TimeOut"); !! My func
tr.getResult() // get the results if it done without timeout..

Why does TaskCanceledException occur?

I have the following test code:
void Button_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
var source = new CancellationTokenSource();
var tsk1 = new Task(() => Thread1(source.Token), source.Token);
var tsk2 = new Task(() => Thread2(source.Token), source.Token);
tsk1.Start();
tsk2.Start();
source.Cancel();
try
{
Task.WaitAll(new[] {tsk1, tsk2});
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// here exception is caught
}
}
void Thread1(CancellationToken token)
{
Thread.Sleep(2000);
// If the following line is enabled, the result is the same.
// token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
}
void Thread2(CancellationToken token)
{
Thread.Sleep(3000);
}
In the thread methods I don't throw any exceptions, but I get TaskCanceledException in try-catch block of the outer code which starts the tasks. Why this happens and what is the purpose of token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); in this case. I believe the exception should only be thrown if I call token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); in the thread method.
I believe this is expected behavior because you're running in to a variation of a race condition.
From How to: Cancel a task and its children:
The calling thread does not forcibly end the task; it only signals that cancellation is requested. If the task is already running, it is up to the user delegate to notice the request and respond appropriately. If cancellation is requested before the task runs, then the user delegate is never executed and the task object transitions into the Canceled state.
and from Task Cancellation:
You can terminate the operation by [...] simply returning from the delegate. In many scenarios this is sufficient; however, a task instance that is "canceled" in this way transitions to the RanToCompletion state, not to the Canceled state.
My educated guess here is that while you are calling .Start() on your two tasks, chances are that one (or both of them) didn't actually start before you called .Cancel() on your CancellationTokenSource. I bet if you put in at least a three second wait between the start of the tasks and the cancellation, it won't throw the exception. Also, you can check the .Status property of both tasks. If I'm right, the .Status property should read TaskStatus.Canceled on at least one of them when the exception is thrown.
Remember, starting a new Task does not guarantee a new thread being created. It falls to the TPL to decide what gets a new thread and what is simply queued for execution.

Proper way to implement a never ending task. (Timers vs Task)

So, my app needs to perform an action almost continuously (with a pause of 10 seconds or so between each run) for as long as the app is running or a cancellation is requested. The work it needs to do has the possibility of taking up to 30 seconds.
Is it better to use a System.Timers.Timer and use AutoReset to make sure it doesn't perform the action before the previous "tick" has completed.
Or should I use a general Task in LongRunning mode with a cancellation token, and have a regular infinite while loop inside it calling the action doing the work with a 10 second Thread.Sleep between calls? As for the async/await model, I'm not sure it would be appropriate here as I don't have any return values from the work.
CancellationTokenSource wtoken;
Task task;
void StopWork()
{
wtoken.Cancel();
try
{
task.Wait();
} catch(AggregateException) { }
}
void StartWork()
{
wtoken = new CancellationTokenSource();
task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
while (true)
{
wtoken.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
DoWork();
Thread.Sleep(10000);
}
}, wtoken, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
}
void DoWork()
{
// Some work that takes up to 30 seconds but isn't returning anything.
}
or just use a simple timer while using its AutoReset property, and call .Stop() to cancel it?
I'd use TPL Dataflow for this (since you're using .NET 4.5 and it uses Task internally). You can easily create an ActionBlock<TInput> which posts items to itself after it's processed it's action and waited an appropriate amount of time.
First, create a factory that will create your never-ending task:
ITargetBlock<DateTimeOffset> CreateNeverEndingTask(
Action<DateTimeOffset> action, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
// Validate parameters.
if (action == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("action");
// Declare the block variable, it needs to be captured.
ActionBlock<DateTimeOffset> block = null;
// Create the block, it will call itself, so
// you need to separate the declaration and
// the assignment.
// Async so you can wait easily when the
// delay comes.
block = new ActionBlock<DateTimeOffset>(async now => {
// Perform the action.
action(now);
// Wait.
await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), cancellationToken).
// Doing this here because synchronization context more than
// likely *doesn't* need to be captured for the continuation
// here. As a matter of fact, that would be downright
// dangerous.
ConfigureAwait(false);
// Post the action back to the block.
block.Post(DateTimeOffset.Now);
}, new ExecutionDataflowBlockOptions {
CancellationToken = cancellationToken
});
// Return the block.
return block;
}
I've chosen the ActionBlock<TInput> to take a DateTimeOffset structure; you have to pass a type parameter, and it might as well pass some useful state (you can change the nature of the state, if you want).
Also, note that the ActionBlock<TInput> by default processes only one item at a time, so you're guaranteed that only one action will be processed (meaning, you won't have to deal with reentrancy when it calls the Post extension method back on itself).
I've also passed the CancellationToken structure to both the constructor of the ActionBlock<TInput> and to the Task.Delay method call; if the process is cancelled, the cancellation will take place at the first possible opportunity.
From there, it's an easy refactoring of your code to store the ITargetBlock<DateTimeoffset> interface implemented by ActionBlock<TInput> (this is the higher-level abstraction representing blocks that are consumers, and you want to be able to trigger the consumption through a call to the Post extension method):
CancellationTokenSource wtoken;
ActionBlock<DateTimeOffset> task;
Your StartWork method:
void StartWork()
{
// Create the token source.
wtoken = new CancellationTokenSource();
// Set the task.
task = CreateNeverEndingTask(now => DoWork(), wtoken.Token);
// Start the task. Post the time.
task.Post(DateTimeOffset.Now);
}
And then your StopWork method:
void StopWork()
{
// CancellationTokenSource implements IDisposable.
using (wtoken)
{
// Cancel. This will cancel the task.
wtoken.Cancel();
}
// Set everything to null, since the references
// are on the class level and keeping them around
// is holding onto invalid state.
wtoken = null;
task = null;
}
Why would you want to use TPL Dataflow here? A few reasons:
Separation of concerns
The CreateNeverEndingTask method is now a factory that creates your "service" so to speak. You control when it starts and stops, and it's completely self-contained. You don't have to interweave state control of the timer with other aspects of your code. You simply create the block, start it, and stop it when you're done.
More efficient use of threads/tasks/resources
The default scheduler for the blocks in TPL data flow is the same for a Task, which is the thread pool. By using the ActionBlock<TInput> to process your action, as well as a call to Task.Delay, you're yielding control of the thread that you were using when you're not actually doing anything. Granted, this actually leads to some overhead when you spawn up the new Task that will process the continuation, but that should be small, considering you aren't processing this in a tight loop (you're waiting ten seconds between invocations).
If the DoWork function actually can be made awaitable (namely, in that it returns a Task), then you can (possibly) optimize this even more by tweaking the factory method above to take a Func<DateTimeOffset, CancellationToken, Task> instead of an Action<DateTimeOffset>, like so:
ITargetBlock<DateTimeOffset> CreateNeverEndingTask(
Func<DateTimeOffset, CancellationToken, Task> action,
CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
// Validate parameters.
if (action == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("action");
// Declare the block variable, it needs to be captured.
ActionBlock<DateTimeOffset> block = null;
// Create the block, it will call itself, so
// you need to separate the declaration and
// the assignment.
// Async so you can wait easily when the
// delay comes.
block = new ActionBlock<DateTimeOffset>(async now => {
// Perform the action. Wait on the result.
await action(now, cancellationToken).
// Doing this here because synchronization context more than
// likely *doesn't* need to be captured for the continuation
// here. As a matter of fact, that would be downright
// dangerous.
ConfigureAwait(false);
// Wait.
await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10), cancellationToken).
// Same as above.
ConfigureAwait(false);
// Post the action back to the block.
block.Post(DateTimeOffset.Now);
}, new ExecutionDataflowBlockOptions {
CancellationToken = cancellationToken
});
// Return the block.
return block;
}
Of course, it would be good practice to weave the CancellationToken through to your method (if it accepts one), which is done here.
That means you would then have a DoWorkAsync method with the following signature:
Task DoWorkAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken);
You'd have to change (only slightly, and you're not bleeding out separation of concerns here) the StartWork method to account for the new signature passed to the CreateNeverEndingTask method, like so:
void StartWork()
{
// Create the token source.
wtoken = new CancellationTokenSource();
// Set the task.
task = CreateNeverEndingTask((now, ct) => DoWorkAsync(ct), wtoken.Token);
// Start the task. Post the time.
task.Post(DateTimeOffset.Now, wtoken.Token);
}
I find the new Task-based interface to be very simple for doing things like this - even easier than using the Timer class.
There are some small adjustments you can make to your example. Instead of:
task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
while (true)
{
wtoken.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
DoWork();
Thread.Sleep(10000);
}
}, wtoken, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
You can do this:
task = Task.Run(async () => // <- marked async
{
while (true)
{
DoWork();
await Task.Delay(10000, wtoken.Token); // <- await with cancellation
}
}, wtoken.Token);
This way the cancellation will happen instantaneously if inside the Task.Delay, rather than having to wait for the Thread.Sleep to finish.
Also, using Task.Delay over Thread.Sleep means you aren't tying up a thread doing nothing for the duration of the sleep.
If you're able, you can also make DoWork() accept a cancellation token, and the cancellation will be much more responsive.
Here is what I came up with:
Inherit from NeverEndingTask and override the ExecutionCore method with the work you want to do.
Changing ExecutionLoopDelayMs allows you to adjust the time between loops e.g. if you wanted to use a backoff algorithm.
Start/Stop provide a synchronous interface to start/stop task.
LongRunning means you will get one dedicated thread per NeverEndingTask.
This class does not allocate memory in a loop unlike the ActionBlock based solution above.
The code below is sketch, not necessarily production code :)
:
public abstract class NeverEndingTask
{
// Using a CTS allows NeverEndingTask to "cancel itself"
private readonly CancellationTokenSource _cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
protected NeverEndingTask()
{
TheNeverEndingTask = new Task(
() =>
{
// Wait to see if we get cancelled...
while (!_cts.Token.WaitHandle.WaitOne(ExecutionLoopDelayMs))
{
// Otherwise execute our code...
ExecutionCore(_cts.Token);
}
// If we were cancelled, use the idiomatic way to terminate task
_cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
},
_cts.Token,
TaskCreationOptions.DenyChildAttach | TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
// Do not forget to observe faulted tasks - for NeverEndingTask faults are probably never desirable
TheNeverEndingTask.ContinueWith(x =>
{
Trace.TraceError(x.Exception.InnerException.Message);
// Log/Fire Events etc.
}, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
}
protected readonly int ExecutionLoopDelayMs = 0;
protected Task TheNeverEndingTask;
public void Start()
{
// Should throw if you try to start twice...
TheNeverEndingTask.Start();
}
protected abstract void ExecutionCore(CancellationToken cancellationToken);
public void Stop()
{
// This code should be reentrant...
_cts.Cancel();
TheNeverEndingTask.Wait();
}
}

Categories

Resources